Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



Groove Basin: Quest For the Ultimate Music Player

serviscope_minor Re:Foobar2000 for Linux (59 comments)

The Ultimate Music Player would be a solid port of Foobar2000 to Linux. Groove Basin...not so much.

OOh it's annual piss on someone's parade day, same as every day!

The poster posted a long, interesting article about building a good (as defined by a list of features, including things like lack of glitchiness and UI responsiveness), solid music player using open source software. The article covered in quite entertaining depth almost every layer of the stack from libav to web interfaces to automatic volume adjustment. It detailed the various pitfalls, flaws and design decisions with reasoning.

And all you bother to do is (and I strongly suspect without even bothering to try it) claim that some other music player which almost certainly doesn't match the feature set is "better" without even bothering to say why.

Basically, you're an arse.

just now

Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

As I've explained, it takes some units of labor

No, as you've asserted repeatedly without the slightest shred of evidence.

Think about if you paid $10,000 for a car, t

Blah balh, but you're not paying, you're asking them to work for you for free. Ain't gonna happen, leech.

12 hours ago

Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)


you don't know about functional programming, pure functions and immutability and you want us to take your word for anything about maintaining a crypto library?

lolz are in order I think.

13 hours ago

Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

Like Internet Explorer is OS agnostic

Da fuq?

Do you like making up lies to support your point, or do you actually believe the drek you're posting?

Anyway it's irrelevant. In 5 weeks no one will even remember LibreSSL was a thing.

No, your point will be irrelevant because someone will port it and LibreSSL will start replacing OpenSSL.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

I'm arguing that they're (metaphorically) a part of a community, and that they're doing substantial work, but they're doing the work in such a way that the community which they are a part of will need to do substantial additional work to benefit from it. If they were to do the work slightly differently, they would not do substantially more work, and yet the whole community would face great benefit.

No, you're full os shit basically. They're doing a huge amount of work. They're going to write portale code because they are good programmers but not going to to the porting---just like openssh. They write good solid portable code, other people port it, everyone wins.

It's basic economics.

It's funny hoy you cite "eonomics" as your argument for why people should give you free stuff. Here's a clue: pay them and they'll do it.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

Let's say you have a function. And you call that function. It does one of two things: either it modifies an object passed to it, or it modifies global state (global variables, etc.)

one of 3 things. It can also compute something based on the data passed to it and not modify the data passed. That's functional style, and is generally considered good practive. The fact that you made such an elementary error after saying:

Ah, I see you don't understand how programming works.

amuses me.

That means merging code between divergent code bases has far-reaching implications.

who says they're merging back? If they are then your whining is for nothing since it will be merged back. If not then your point is moot.

There is a 100% chance that the work required to fix OpenSSL as-is and keep it portable between OSes is substantially less than the work required to first fix OpenSSL with reckless abandon and make it non-portable, then go back through and pick it apart and work out how to make it portable again.

You make this assertion, so prove it. The open BSD people are good programmers so they likely do not scatter OS dependenies throughout the code, but keep them cleanly at boundaries.

That means

No, because your assumption is faulty, your conculsions are unsupported.

The OpenBSD developers are worth nothing.

says the man who never uses SSH and never used a machine administered by ssh.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Please don't (299 comments)

Rather, they apparently don't (hence the donations plea).

Seems unlikely they do. OpenBSD is a full time project. Also, wouldn't it be rather unethical to spend money donated to OpenBSD to work on non OpenBSD things. Besides whay makes you think these people even have Linux/Mac/Windows/iOS/wtfOS machines on which to do the porting?

What they do have time for is forking OpenSSL, cutting out the stuff they don't care about,

and then fixing up and auditing the code and providing a free, incredibly secure and open source operating system to everyone in the world, portable to something liek 20 pltforms. What bad people.

and slapping each other on the back for giving OpenSSL a good poke in the eye.

Basically you're a combination of paranoid and entitled. I think someone else described peolpe like you as shitheads. I'm inclined to agree. Tell you what: if you come over to my house and dig my garden for free, to my *exact* specification and travelling at your own expense (no, I won't provide you with lunch or even cups of tea and certainly not accomodation when it inevitably takes you more than a day), then I'll accept your argument that the OpenBSD people should be giving you even more free stuff than they already are.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Graphic design geniuses too (299 comments)

And your post goes right along with the notion that Slashdot is filled with shitheads.

Yeah basically this. The sense of entitlement from people is quite astonishing. It's not good enough that they provide a free, amazingly secure OS, a free suite of SSH tools used by the entire world and are provideing a complete, open, audited implementation of SSL apparently.

No, they should do more, for free on their own time.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

Actually, in my community...

So? I don't live in your comminuty. I live elsewhere so what you did there is useless to me. So, come over to my place and fix it up. No, I *DEMAND* you do, or I shall say mean things about you on the internet. In fact I shall say exactly the same silly things about you being a selfish bastard and how fuck me and basically all the same silly things you're saying about the OBSD developers.

Basically you're whining about how they're not (metaphorically) flying 5000 miles to fix up a house in your community and in your defense you're saying you are a good person because you fixed one in your community so it doesn't matter that you didn't fly 5000 miles to fix mine.

So either come and fix my house or stop complaining that the OpenBSD people aren't fixing yours.

Similarly to the "doing it wrong the first time" pattern, my kitchen was built with a wide opening.

Your analogy is poor. I better analogy would be ripping out the kitchen completely and then fixing all the rotten beams underneath it, then doing a complete structural survey to make sure it's not going to callapse all of a sudden in the future. All that is expensive and hard no matter what.

That fact that they're putting in just enough support material to get it running in one place (or if you like, tacking a few power sockets and basic plumbing) is not going to prevent yourself from building a lovely completely flawed analogy on top of this.

But we do get to tell people we're not doing a giant ego wank, and instead are doing what's best for the community.

Just like you with your dubious story at the beginning about you you improved your local community, the OpenBSD people are doing exactly the same with their local community. And you're whining because they're not putting in even more time to fix yours as well.

So, the offer stands: if you come and do my garden for me for free at your own expense then I'll accept your point that the OpenBSD people should do more free work for you than they're already doing.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

That's part of the initial work.

I'd say that's a good fraction if it.

Once the code is re-ported and re-imported into the (diverging) OpenSSL base

Who says they're going to do that? Much more likely that LibreSSL will be an API compatible alternative. They're only going to re-integrate if LibreSSL clean up which essentially means removing a huge amount of dead code. Which is what the OBSD people are doing.

it will require an additional audit.

Good job they're not doing it then.

Things like Frama-C produce reports on impact analysis--you changed one line in one function and it affected 15% of your entire 2 million line code base.

That sounds like poor design. The OBSD people are world class experts at producing secure, audited OS level C code.

Decades of research indicate that doing something not-quite-right the first time and then going back and redoing it requires more labor than doing it right the first time.

Who says what they're doing is wrong? They're making it for OpenBSD, but OpenBSD is not a whacky system. Besides it's much easier to make sane changes against a small, well written codebase than it is to make small changes against a hairy hoary mess.

The argument is that this other strategy reaches a given end state with less total work.

Actually, no your argument was that the OBSD developers were penis waving. Ignoring that for the moment, they're trying to get down to a small audited core. This means ripping out everything that harms that goal leaving behind a small, well organised core.

Perhaps it is better to make the core more portable than go for OBSD only then see what breaks when it's being ported. There are basically a few options here: try to fix the old codebase without breaking portability (very hard), make it sane first (what they're doing now) and make it sane without sacrafiacing portability.

The middle option is the least work, and this happens to be what they're doing. It's also the only option which aligns with their goals---not only is OBSD of personal interest to these people, but it would be deeply unethical of them to use OpenBSD funding to work on other operating systems.

However they're not being dicks about it and they're not going to make life hard for you if you want a portable version: they'll even integrate it right now if you have the changes.

They're making a political move. To argue directly against your argument, I would have to argue for the closing of the OpenBSD project entirely.

So basically, you think that Theo de Raadt, who has put a vast amount of his own time and effort into this should just stop because you say so? Are you for real?

I have instead provided a counter-argument that they could, you know, contribute to the community at large instead of to their own ego.

They provide one of the most secure OSs ever made completely for free for anyone who wants. How is this not contributing to the community? They also provide OpenSSH(d), the most widely set of ssh tools in the world. Again how is this not contributing to the community? Finally off their own backs they're doing a complete stripdown and audit of the most popular SSL library free for anyone to use. Not only that, they'll even keep it up to date. How the fuck is that not contributing to the community?

But no, you're suggesting that Theo and crew should just give up and contribute *DIRECTLY* to you. I doubt de Raadt even owns a Windows or Linux machine. Why and how do you think he would do portability to those systems?

Your sense of entitlement is *incredible*. Truly, I've been flaming on the internet for years and yet you are possibly the most entitles person I've met.

This is a think-of-the-children move. "Look how bad these OpenSSL people are! We're going to do a bunch of work to make things better

Yay! That's fantastic news! They're ripping out ancient and hideous VMS compatibility code and other evils which have accumulated over the years. And fixing double frees.

But it won't be better for YOU!

It will if you (a) run OpenBSD, (b) help/pay for them to port it to Linux or (c) wait until that port inevitably gets done by other people who aren't cheap and lazy. So it will be better for you but you'll either have to (a) install OpenBSD---which is free BTW, (b) donate time/money or (c) wait until someone else does. Poor you, how you must be suffering with other perople giving you all this awesome stuff for free.

It's just really being done to mock OpenSSL and show you that we're awesome, because we have things YOU don't have!

Paranoia alert! No, it'e being done to provide a secure SSL implementation for OpenBSD.

Oh, but you could do a bunch of extra work yourself to take OUR things back and improve YOUR things.

That or install OpenBSD. And I can assure you it would be less work for you to port it than the strip down and audit in the first place.

We won't do that though, because we're... ...OpenBSD developers and we like working on OpenBSD and don't enjoy working on other OSs in our spare time or on the dime of people who have paid for us to work on Open BSD.

Sadly, however there are a metrick fuckton of... ...selfish tantrum-babies...

on the internet who believe we should work for them for free.

But, OUR thing is free, so you know. We're really awesome!

Basically yes. They're giving awesome stuff away for free. If you don't like it you can simply pretend it doesn't exist and you've lost nothing.

And fuck you all who don't use our thing, we're not here to help you infidels! We should fly a plane into your house!"

You should really see a doctor. I think you need better meds.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

My point is that it costs less in labor to rewrite OpenSSL cleaned-up but OpenBSD only without consideration for other OSes than it does to rewrite OpenSSL with no such consideration. Then, when you go back and fix the now-broken OpenSSL rewrite (LibreSSL), you add more than the difference in that labor: it requires more overall effort to do this one-and-a-half times than to do it right once.

Well, the OpenBSD people disagree with you. You also forgot the auditing of the code that they're goig to be doing once it's fixed. Much easier on a clean codebase.

They're not giving everyone a rewritten OpenSSL; they're giving everyone the concept of a rewritten OpenSSL, which you can put into use on OpenBSD, or you can apply your own effort or apply money to OpenBSD to get written to work on Linux/FreeBSD/Windows.

So they're buiding something they need for themselves personally, but are generous to make it available to everyone should anyone else need it. And they'll even let you freely modify it if it doesn't fit your needs! Not only that but if your mods are of no benefit to them but cleanly written and useful to others, they'll even go out of their way to include them in their project. What nice people. I think they should be applauded for their philanthropy.

They do sound like awfully nice people to me.

It's really a shame that there are so many people on the internet who complain they they're not spending even more time and even more effort to give more away for free. But there you go: some people just have a sense of entitlement out of all proportion.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

Conflicting stances.

No, not really. The OpenBSD people are working on OpenBSD for free because they want to. If you complain because they're not working on your preferred thing for free, you come across as a huge dick---precisely what you were complaining about said developers for waving around.

The fact of the matter is they have two possible modes of operation:

Holy false dichotomy batman!

Contribute code back to OpenSSL

The code is out there for the OpenSSL devs to take if they want. In fact it's all in the form of versioned patches against the OpenSSL code base. If the OpenSSL devs don't want to take it, then there's going to be a fork. That's not the fault of OpenBSD. The chances are there will be a fork because the goals of OpenSSL and OpenBSD are divergent.

or create a project tied to OpenBSD that won't run elsewhere.

Or the third way of creating a portable library.

They've voiced openly that this new code will run on OpenBSD but not elsewhere,

Seems reasonable. Their goal is to make a secure, BSD licensed operating system. I can see why they'd not want to waste their precious, valuable free (and sometimes funded by OpenBSD donors) time working on things which aren't open BSD.

but that they'll fix it to run elsewhere if you give them money

Sounds reasonable to me. If you want a programmer to work on something for you that they don't already want to do themselves, then you pay them. Completely reasonable. I won't port my libraries to Windows or MacOS unless someone pays me because I don't like working on windows and don't own a Mac.

Or, you could apply your own effort to it.

Isn't OSS neat? You don't even have to pay them! If you do the work up to an acceptable level of quality, they'll even bless it and include it in the official release. What decent, stand-up people they are.

Fact of the matter is they're not being philanthropic;

Of course they are: they're providing a complete, free, secure operating system with many components that with little effort can be released elsewhere. For free, using their own time an effort. Just because they're not giving you exactly what you want doesn't make them not philanthropic.

Do you also complain donate money to a registered charity instead of you personally? Does that also make them not philanthropists?

they're dangling a carrot and telling you if you want it you can either pay them to bring it down to you or you can climb the mountain and come take it

So basically they're providing some great free carrots and you're objecting because they're not walking up to you and stuffing it in your mouth. And it's hardly a mountain.

They're putting in some effort to grow the carrot,

If by some you mean a far, far more more than it would take for you to dray yourself up there, then yes. It's their time to put in. They can do it how they like. Dictating to them how they shoudl spend their time without offering the slightest incentive makes you seem entitled.

but they've decided to plant their carrot field atop a mountain instead of using the fertile farm land at the base where the villagers can get to it.

You mean they've put it where they need it rather than where a bunch of useleless people who have never contributed a thing to them and do nothing but whine on the internet would find it most useful. Oh the huge manatee! The bastards. How could they!

Only the elite--the rich or the strong--can get the carrot,

Or the people who run OpenBSD. It's free and open source. It even comes precompiled. Go install it for free and enjoy the fruits of their labour. Or contribute $1. If everyone who whinged like you contributed a dollar, you'd have it by now.

If you count your self as not rich enough to contribute a dollar and not strong enough to install OpenBSD or hack some C code, then you really do have my depeest sympathy. Well a bit anyway.

Anyway, your root vegetable analogy is wearing thin.

Tell you what, how about you come over to my house at a time of my choosing (I'm a busy man) and at your own expense (I don't see why I should have to pay you for travel if I'm not going to pay you for the work) and dig my garden for me for free and exactly how I like (it has to be just-so or it doesn't count). t's all for a good cause too: if you come over and make my garden perfect then I'll join the local open gardens scheme and donate the proceeds to charity like everyone else on the scheme.

If you do that, then I'll accept your points. If you won't then you're just another pseudonymous random on the internet complaining about how people aren't spending their free time in a way you don't like.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Please don't (299 comments)

Don't fork SSL

They're not.

we need to keep one standard

They are.

This is a bad idea.

It's not because your assumptions bove are faulty.

These resources could be used to improve OpenSSL directly.

That's exactly what they are doing. But they're forking OpenSSL because they want to do it their way.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Or.. (299 comments)

Strong, your hatred of OpenBSD is. Blinded you are.

Actually, more like a raging fuckwit you are.

It's not about a better OpenSSL. It's about OpenBSD waving its penis around.

Frankly you're a complete fucking idiot if you think that. Basically if you persist on believing it, you are either ignorant or stupid. If the former, there's no excuse because it've been covered so many times on just slashdot alone. Therefor it's wilful ignorance. Actually I think it's malice because you appear to hate OpenBSD for no rational reason.

OpenBSD want an API compatible, SAFE version of OpenSSL for their operating system. Rather than whining on the internet with their tumb up their ass, they're actually doing something about it. So they can provide a safe, BSD licensed operating system, which is their goal.

The OpenSSL team is amenable to aid; but they have two developers and no help.

So? That's the fault of the 10,000 companies out there who use openSSL but were too stupid to consider it worth chucking a few bucks to the OpenSSL team. The fact that the OpenBSD team is doing something about it is not a fault with the OpenBSD team.

OpenBSD is essentially holding OpenSSL hostage by making their own version, not contributing back, and making it OS-specific to OpenBSD

Well, I guess they should have used a different license then. The OpenBSD folks aren't even makeing it closed source. It's out there if you want it. And it's specific to OpenBSD because---guess what---it's being done by OpenBSD developers. But they're good programmers and good people. It's not going to be heavily tied to OpenBSD. It will be pretty portable code.

OpenBSD unless you give them money to make it not.

OMG nuuuu!!111oneeleven People on the internet aren't working for free for me!! How dare those evil fuckers want to get fucking paid for FUCKING WORK!!! The bastards! They're doing nothing but waving their penises around. How dare they.

whine whine blah blah

No one is obligated to work for you for free. Fact is they actually are because OpenSSL badly needed this cleanup of the outer crap. The OpenBSD people are doing it for free in their own time and it's quite astonishingly arrogant of you (who hasn't donated a dollar or an hour of your time) to complain about how.

The chances are with the code being cleaned up, it will actually be more easily portable to other systems modern than the old code. They're not doing damage because the old code is still there and you can keep using it warts and all for as long as you like.


Not Just a Cleanup Any More: LibreSSL Project Announced

serviscope_minor Re:Graphic design geniuses too (299 comments)

Comic Sans doesn't exactly inspire confidence for people who now view the open source development model as dubious.

Maybe in 2000, I would have cared but no longer. OSS is very well established and is in plenty of cases the leading option. If people want to make stupid emotional decisions, then it's time to let them. No actually, it's time to encourage them because it means I will have fewer serious competitors of the competition hamstring themselves with ill-informed emotional decisions.


Experiment Suggests Monkeys Can Do Basic Math

serviscope_minor Re:Arithmetic != Math (85 comments)

Arithmetic != Math

No, but Aritthmatic \in Maths.

When one makes claims about whether one can do maths or not, one is not referring to being able to do everything in the entirety of mathematics. One is making claims about a rather small subset. Arithmetic is a small subset of maths. If monkeys can do basic arithmetic, then it's fair to say they can do basic maths.

novel proof that the square root of two is irrational.

That's something almost no one in the entire world can do. So, if that's your definition of "doing math", then you've excluded almost everyone. It's therefore a useless definition.


The Ethical Dilemmas Today's Programmers Face

serviscope_minor Re:that's why I'm single (165 comments)

I stay single so I can always do the ethical thing and never need money.

Odd choice. One of the many benefits of being not single is the potential for two salaries. My partner can cover costs for both of us if I'm out of work. I can do likewise.


The Ethical Dilemmas Today's Programmers Face

serviscope_minor Re:Not a programmer's problem, a managerial one (165 comments)

"It's been 3 minutes since you last sucessfully posted a comment."

This is location specific for me. In some places I can post freely, in others I have to wait 5 minutes between posts.


Why Portland Should Have Kept Its Water, Urine and All

serviscope_minor Re:They're just avoiding liability (330 comments)

Because you are stupid and crazy?

Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation of water? Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?

2 days ago

AMD Not Trying To Get Its Chips Into Low-Cost Tablets

serviscope_minor Re:So AMD wants to doom themselves to...mediocrity (87 comments)

Okay, Intel chips tend to outperform AMD on a clock-for-clock and core-for-core basis. So Intel has the high end pretty firmly locked in.

Interesting to see how this changes. On straight up single threaded workloads, AMD is unlikely to pull even. However, the nanosecond latency with HSA can prove iteresting. So far about the only benchmark actually written for that architecture was the libreoffice calc one. We got to see AMDs APU destroy everything Intel has to offer on that one by a vast margin.

Not everything will work with HSA, but far more things than GPGPU due to the low latecy and large memory space.

2 days ago



Ask slashdot: Clusters on the cheap?

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  more than 2 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "Dear Slashdotters,

A friend of mine has recently started a research group. As usual with these things, she is on a shoestring budget and has computational demands. The computational task is very parallel (but implementing it on GPUs is an open research problem and not the topic of research), and very CPU bound.

Can slashdotters advise on a practical way of getting really high bang for buck? The budget is about 4000 GBP (excluding VAT/sales tax), though it is likely that the system will be expanded later.

The computers will probably end up running a boring Linux distro and Sun GridEngine to manage batch processing (with home directories shared over NFS?)."

Best removable storage filesystem for Linux?

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  about 4 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "What filesystem do you use for portable disks, especially large ones, under Linux? FAT is simply not very good. Using a proper filesystem (e.g. ext3) preserves the read/write permissions of the original machine which is rather annoying when the disk is moved to a different machine with differet user IDs. So is there a way to have a good filesystem that supports all the unixy things such as symlinks, and an execute bit, but does not require lots of chown'ing as root when moved to a different machine?"

ARM Based netbook.

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  more than 5 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "Shopping in Robert Dyas of all places (note to non English readers, this is a fairly generic hardware store and has only a small selection of electronics at best) I noticed Inkia ARM based netbooks being advertised, though careful readers will note that the specs seem to differ slightly. The specs are the usual netbook ones along with an 800x480 screen 64Meg RAM, 1G flash and a 400 (or maybe 533MHz) Samsung ARM processor and WinCE. So, it looks like the first non-x86 netbooks have arrived. Sadly, this one is rather expensive, being slightly cheaper than the EEE 2G, with a painfully small amount of RAM, less storage and battery power. But this brings up several interesting questions: are they going to get much cheaper, are there ones with more memory, and will it run OpenBSD? The specs are very similar to the Sharp Zaurus 3000 series which runs OpenBSD very well, but running Firefox in 64M is somewhat painful."

Liquid explosives: no danger and no plot.

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  more than 5 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "It has already been established in a previous article that bringing down an aircraft with liquid explosives mixed on a pllane would be very difficult. The men accused of the plot werer brought to trial and a verdict has now been reached. There was not enough evidence to convice any of them of targeting a plane. So apparently, there was not much evidence of a plot that could not have worked anyway."

Good profiling tools for C/C++ unser un*x?

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  more than 6 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "It should be well known to any developer that you should only optimize parts of a program which need optimizing. And the way to find those parts is through profiling. This simplifies one point: profiling is difficult. The obvious way is to enable profiling in the compiler and use gprof, but this has problems. Firstly there is no point in profiling a program without turning on -O3 (or which ever), since this can change the results dramatically. Secondly, -O3 will inline functions which can ruin profiling results by making them far too coarse. Even if it doesn't do this, there is no way of determining which part of a function is taking up all the time. So that brings me to my question: does anyone know of profiling tools which do not suffer from these problems? My platform is C++ (using g++) on Linux."

serviscope_minor serviscope_minor writes  |  more than 6 years ago

serviscope_minor (664417) writes "You heard earlier today that Dell will be shipping Ubuntu on selected models. Naturally, this is interesting to slashdotters. However, the interest generated by a wider audience will ultimately be more important. Well, apparently, this is the 3rd most popuar topic on the BBC at the moment. So apparently this is interesting to a general audience. I believe that this bodes very well for the future."


Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account